INFORMATION THAT OBAMA WILL NOT EXPLAIN TO THE VOTERS!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
Obama and ACORN GPS Marking EVERY Front Door in America?

By JB Williams Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Republican Senator Judd Gregg was Obama’s first choice for the Secretary of Commerce post, and Gregg was actually considering joining the Obama team, until he found out that control of the US Census was being stripped from the Commerce Department and placed under the direct control of White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel.

Then, the same week that Americans learned that they were “domestic terrorists”—at least according to Obama’s new DHS (Department of Homeland Security),—if they own a bible, a pocket Constitution or guns, and still believe in Life, Liberty and Freedom, - they also learned that Obama’s Census Bureau had hired thousands of new temporary employees, equipped each with a handheld GPS computer and sent them out to mark GPS coordinates for every residential front door in America.

Oddly, it was this same period that news was breaking of an international flu pandemic, suspected of being a weaponized strain of the virus never before seen, - and that Obama’s team still sees no need to close the US-Mexican border, despite the cross continental spread of a deadly illness now claiming American lives.

Now, if any one of these events happened alone, one might not get too excited. But when a string of such events happen all at once, one begins to question the string of freedom and life threatening coincidences…

I can’t resist the urge to question the authority and purpose behind such a BIG BROTHER initiative, when the official Census itself is not due to be taken until 2010…

No imagination is required to think up a whole laundry list of evil that could be done with a nationwide GPS grid of coordinate’s markers painted on every private home across the country. But I was having trouble thinking up one good reason for it, even one legitimate use that would justify what must be a very expensive undertaking.

According to one of the Census workers, who spoke with me on condition of anonymity, they must GPS mark the coordinates “within 40 ft of every front door” in America and they are supposed to complete that mission nation wide, within 90 days, by the end of July 2009.

The workers were not told why they were GPS marking every front door. But a supervisor is sent out to follow them door-to-door, to make certain that no door is left unmarked. Every door will be marked by one employee, and then checked by a follow-up supervisor.

So, I had to ask, why?
Why does the Obama administration need or want the latitude and longitude coordinates for every home in America? Why the rush to GPS paint every home in the next 90 days? Why must the marker be within 40 ft of every front door? For what possible purpose does the Fed need GPS coordinates for every home, and under what authority do they have the right? Census workers, whom I asked, had the same holy-crap look on their faces that I had by then…

ACORN signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States — currently believed to be more than 306 million people. But the count doesn’t take place until 2010… This is April 2009.

Obama’s interest in an ACORN controlled 2010 Census, for the purpose of redistricting to the advantage of Democrats before the 2010 mid-term elections, comes as NO shock from a regime known for their heavy handed Rules for Radicals political strategies. But what does this have to do with GPS marking every home in the country?

The 2% of Americans, who have served military duty at some point in life, are very familiar with the most common use of GPS target painting. The other 98% of Americans might want to pick up a book on the subject, such as The Precision Revolution: GPS and the Future of Aerial Warfare ...

Their Authority?
RightSoup.com has just about the only online report available on the matter, and they report, “Why does the government (and ACORN) need to have the GPS coordinates of your FRONT DOOR? Your house is probably on Google Maps already. But the front door? Sounds like a jackboot convenience to me. This is a developing story, and several reports of those who have already been visited by the GPS squad can be found in this forum thread.”

If you challenge Census Bureau employees about the GPS marking of your private residence, you will be handed a preprinted explanation referring you to Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2, which explains the penalties for refusing to provide names and statistics of occupants when asked for by a census taker. This only applies when they are taking a census, (which will not be taken until next year), and the penalty for refusing to answer questions for a census is up to a $500 fine.

However, since the actual Census is not due to be taken until 2010, nobody is asking for any information today. They are only GPS marking your front door today, and Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2 provides the Fed NO authority to GPS paint your front door.

Best I can tell, the Fed has NO authority whatsoever, to paint the front door of every private residence in America. Still, that is exactly what they are doing. Now, the trillion dollar question is, why?

A State of Emergency
From Wikipedia - The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (such as states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

In short, the statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard operating under federal authority, from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States.

As members of the military are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution and the American people against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, a federal order to do the exact opposite, and take aim at American citizens, would be a clear violation of the US Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, unless…

US Military personnel are trained to follow orders. But they are also obligated to refuse any order deemed “unlawful.” In order to make such an order appear “lawful,” the federal government would first have to declare a national “state of emergency,” such as in the case of an international pandemic, which can be demonstrated to threaten the health and well-being of American citizens.

Following a state of emergency declaration, a federal order for Martial Law would be expected, to allegedly provide law enforcement and security for citizens. This type of scenario can be followed by a presidential order to quarantine, disarm and contain American citizens in the name of national security, all of it, having the appearance of being “lawful.”

Is this what is happening?

Connecting the Dots
Alone, individual events look concerning, but not conspiratorial. What about when you place the pieces of the puzzle together and take a look at the entire picture developing?

Under this “theory,” how does the GPS marking of every private residence in the nation fit into the picture?

I wish I knew… but I don’t!

What I do know is this… Coincidences of this number and magnitude don’t happen. They certainly do not happen all at the same time, within hours or days of each other, out of the wild blue tin-foil hat heaven…

I also know that people had better start asking the right people the right questions and demanding answers fast. Begin with asking the mainstream press why there has been no public notification of the federal governments GPS marking your front door?

Then, I suggest contacting your local Census Bureau office immediately, and demanding an explanation as well as advice as to what law gives them the right to GPS paint every front door in America?

I’d also recommend sending a copy of this column to your state and federal representative, demanding that they put a stop to it or explain why it’s necessary, and what law gives them the right?

Unfortunately, we live in a moment of history when real events are much stranger than nutty conspiracy theories. The people have every right to know what is happening. But unless you demand to know, nobody’s talking!

Bill Clinton sold US nuclear technology to Red China for a mere $300,000 in campaign contributions. The event landed Chinese bagman Johnny Chung in prison, but put Hillary Clinton in the US Senate, and now at the helm of the US State Department.

Highly secured government servers are hacked daily. Soon, hackers will be able to grab a nation wide GPS grid map, marking the front door of every home in America.

How much is a GPS grid of every American household worth to the enemies of America, both foreign and domestic? I’d estimate, PRICELESS!

There is a foul odor resonating from the current regime in Washington DC and most Americans can smell it. Can most Americans gather the strength to do something about it?

DO AMERICANS REALLY WANT TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF MEDICAL CARE?

The latest health scare has awakened the American electorate to the way our Medical System treats patients who are or suspected to be infected with the latest strain of swine flu.Any one who feels they have the flu can go to the emergency room and receive examination, and if need be treatment.

An article in the today's "Daily Telegraph" shows the fatal faults of going down the road to government controlled medical care. Great Britain has had socialized Medicine for thirty years. Run by bureaucrats, not doctors. As a result many physicians have fled Great Britain to practice in America, and many hospitals have closed as the budget for health care is gradually reduced to switch money to the social welfare system.

The following is a a copy of an article warning the British people of the dire circumstances that await them if the Swine Flu hits hard in their country!
" The world is now on the brink of the first flu pandemic in 40 years, with the World Health Organisation's (WHO) alert status at five out of six.

The Department of Health is printing leaflets to put through every door urging people to find "flu friends" who can bring them groceries and supplies if they fall ill.

However, the Department of Health (DoH) document seen by The Daily Telegraph warns that, during the peak of a flu pandemic, complications such as pneumonia could mean there are 10 times as many people requiring ventilators as the NHS can supply.

If demand cannot be met, it recommends doctors deny treatment to the weakest patients so that resources can be shared among the greatest number.

The draft document, which was written in September before the outbreak of swine flu, acknowledges that its recommendations open "controversial ethical issues" and could cause anger and violence from relatives of those refused care.

Doctors taking decisions to deny care are urged to fully document their decisions to protect themselves from litigation, while hospitals are warned that "additional security decisions may be necessary because of the risks of violence directed at staff making triage decisions".

The document, Pandemic Influenza: surge capacity and prioritisation in health services, sets out the criteria which doctors should use to determine which patients receive intensive care.

If there is competition for places in intensive care units, patients suffering from advanced cancer could be refused beds along with pensioners suffering from severe burns, those with multiple organ failure and children suffering from advanced cancer, severe burns or trauma.

If patients competing for life support are likely to have an equal benefit from treatment, decisions should be taken by lottery, the guidance concludes.

The document describes the pressures that the NHS suffered during the last two pandemics, in 1957 and 1969, which caused a total of 3 million deaths worldwide.

It states that the impact of the 1969 outbreak was lessened by a high number of spare hospital beds at the time. The document says cuts to spare bed capacity, so that the health service is now working "at or near capacity", a 31 per cent increase in the number of over-65s, a more complicated out-of-hours system for GPs and more widespread use of critical care would all make it more likely that intensive care units could be "rapidly overwhelmed".

Meanwhile, NHS Direct took a more than 10,000 calls in total on Wednesday and almost 3,000 of them related to swine flu – more than double the calls received on Monday about the virus, reflecting how public concern is growing.

A spokesman for the DoH said: "We have published this draft guidance to help clinicians to work within an ethical framework during a pandemic."
Note: bold letters are used by me to emphasize the critical issues of this article that should alert all senior citizens and especially AARP. But since they are not really concerned about seniors other than when it comes to Liberal causes. I do not expect to see any warnings from them!

NOW IT IS THE "LITTLE" GUYS WHO ARE TO BLAME!?

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE AUTO WORKERS UNION MADE LITTLE OR NO CONCESSIONS TO HELP AVOID THE IMPENDING CHRYSLER BANKRUPTCY. THE "LITTLE GUY", THE SMALL SHARE HOLDER IS GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO CAUSED CHRYSLER TO FALL INTO BANKRUPTCY!

Government mandates that were put in place to placate environmentalists, that put a strain on the design and manufacture a competitive car to bring to the world market will not be mentioned. And thee outrageous demands on Chrysler by it's union will not be mentioned by the President when he speaks at noon today. After all the UAW spent millions to get him elected!
The bad guy is the stock holder who did not want to accept pennies on the dollar(33 cents) for the stocks and bonds. While the Union and Obama get to run their company.
Big banks and foreign lenders would be protected, but the share holders would be left out in the cold. Sooo! The stockholders choose to take their chances before a bankruptcy judge, like any other company not involved with political fat cats or big unions would normally do if a company failed.

From Times Online April 30, 2009 we learn this about the impending bankruptcy

"White House confirms Chrysler will go bankrupt
Christine Seib in New York and Robin Pagnamenta (Source)
"Chrysler will declare itself bankrupt today, White House officials confirmed, after last minute talks with the carmaker’s smaller lenders broke down late last night.

President Barack Obama, accompanied by members of his car taskforce, will make a statement on the issue at noon today.

White House officials said that the carmaker had the full support of its stakeholders, including its largest lenders and union.

An Administration official accused Chrysler's smaller lenders of "failing to act in either their own economic interest or the national interest" but added that Chrysler now had an opportunity to restructure and "emerge stronger going forward".

He said: "After a month of tireless negotiations, the Administration went into yesterday afternoon with the full support of Chrysler's key stakeholders, including the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the largest creditors. That support remains."

The bankruptcy filing comes after the breakdown of talks with Chrysler's smaller lenders. They had refused to write off their share of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt. Chrysler had offered $2 billion in cash in return for the debt being written off, which was accepted by the four largest lenders — JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.

The US Treasury last night sweetened the offer to $2.25 million, but some of Chrysler's 42 smaller lenders, including a number of hedge funds, refused the deal.

A group of 20 renegade lenders, which control about $1 billion of Chrysler's debt, said today that they were forced to conduct negotiations with Chrysler and the Treasury though the four big banks, which the smaller lenders described as "obviously conflicted" because the banks had taken billions of dollars in Government bailouts. My comment is why are these people called "renegade". All they want is a fair return on their investment!

The lenders, who said that they had not taken a dime in bailout cash, said that they had been willing to write off 40 per cent of their debt, accepting considerably less than was being offered by the company to more junior creditors.

"Our offer has been flatly rejected or ignored," the lender group said. "The Government has risked overturning the rule of law and practices that have governed our world-leading bankruptcy code for decades."

But senior Administration officials described the lenders' claims as completely untrue. All lenders received direct communications and were able to participate in the same repayment offer, officials said. My comment on this; Is why should we believe Obama's spinmasters on this subject when we have been lied to so many times in the last one hundred days?

The Treasury has prepared for Chrysler to enter a brief “surgical” bankruptcy that avoids liquidating the company. They never wantr to give up their strangle hold on the auto makers in Michigan, so they can dictate that they make "green type" cars!

Details of Chrysler's tie-up with Fiat, the Italian carmaker, are expected to be outlined today .

A quick bankruptcy would allow Fiat to pick and choose the assets it wanted from Chrysler without taking on some of the company's liabilities and underperforming businesses. These will once again be assumed by the Obama administration for the "RUBE" taxpayers whom already have a 13 trillion dollar debt oppressing them!


Where will it end, and when??????

WHY THE USA SHOULD NOT SIGN THE UNCLOS TREATY

Many people think that the treaty UNCLOS, being pushed by Obama and his Democratic supporters,for the Senate to Ratify, is all about rules of the Oceans.

In fact the framework of the treaty being promoted by the "One World" supporters has great impact on much more than the seas. The treaty has definite regulations regarding the extraction of minerals and fossil fuels from the floor of the oceans. In particular it has definite limitations on the Arctic shelf as this post in the current issue of Der Spiegel.com illustrates.

"The most significant international agreement for the current debate on jurisdiction and sovereign rights in the Arctic is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Often described as a "constitution for the oceans," the convention, which came into force in 1994, has now been ratified by 155 nations, including Germany. The United States is the only major industrial nation not to have signed the treaty.


The UNCLOS permits coastal states to establish an "exclusive economic zone" extending up to 200 nautical miles -- the so-called 200-mile-zone -- within which they exercise sovereign rights over both the waters and the seabed. However, this sovereign territory may be extended depending on how far the continental land mass extends out under the ocean. In such cases the outer boundaries of this so-called continental shelf must be precisely defined and documented.

Cut-off lines are determined by a number of factors, including the structure of the ocean floor, sediment thickness and ocean depth. Such definitions can be a matter of dispute, as in the case of the Lomonosov Ridge, a mountain range extending over 1500 kilometers under the Arctic Ocean. Determining whether this geological formation is part of the continental shelf of Russia, Canada, or Denmark/Greenland is crucial to deciding which country has sovereign rights over the seabed around the North Pole".

A coastal state must submit its claims to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf within a ten-year period following its ratification of the convention. The deadline for submissions relating to the Arctic is now approaching and it is for this reason that the "race" is on.


The discussion of national rights in this context is also often dogged by a lack of terminological clarity both on the part of policymakers and the media, particularly when it comes to the concept of sovereignty. There is no question here of states denying access to shipping or preventing fishing on the high seas. Outside the 200-mile zone the only relevant issue is the right to utilization of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources.
A story that was not reported by our Left wing Media is the meeting held in Greenland during the spring of 2008 one month after Obama was elected.By this time he was touting his office of the President-elect. A position that does not exist in the Constitution.

In response to the debate on the utilization of the Arctic Ocean, Denmark's foreign minister and the premier of Greenland invited representatives of four other coastal states (Canada, United States, Norway, and Russia) to attend a conference in the Greenland town of Ilulissat. The conference ended on May 29 with the adoption of the Ilulissat Declaration, which declared that climate change and the melting of the polar ice have a "potential impact" on vulnerable ecosystems, the livelihoods of local inhabitants and indigenous communities, and the potential exploitation of natural resources.
Apparently our government representatives at this meeting agreed to the presently unproven theory of Global Warming at this conference before our Congress has even voted on the issue!

Due to their sovereign rights and jurisdiction in large areas of the Arctic Ocean, the five coastal states see themselves in a "unique position" to address these possibilities and challenges. The decisive formulations in the declaration relate to the UNCLOS. The signatories agree that the law of the sea provides for important rights and obligations regarding the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf, the protection of the marine environment, freedom of navigation, and marine research. The declaration states: "We remain committed to this legal framework and to the orderly settlement of any possible overlapping claims." In other words, Ilulissat affirms the status of the Convention on the Law of the Sea as the definitive document in relation to the Arctic.
This just one more example of the way government officials operate behind the cloak of secrecy to sign away our rights and freedoms without the Constitutional authority. No wonder the public opinion of the Congress is so low! Why would a man who promised that he would have an open and transparent government, allow this to happen without letting the public know about it? Surely his transition team that was in Washington at this time had to know about this meeting. Why did they not make any comment about the ramifications of this meeting?
The answer is that Obama is doing what he wants irregardless of the wishes of the electorate, as long as he satisfies the 61% who elected him. The rest of us be damned!

THERE OUGHT TO BE A LAW!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
unfortunately WE HAVE TO ADD ONE MORE EVIL TO THAT WHICH OUR GOVERNMENT CAN DO TO US. IT CAN AND IS SOCIALIZING OUR MAIN INDUSTRIES.

The blatant lie hat Mr. Gibbs told to the press corp recently is an example of the duplicity and double talking that is coming out of the "Chicago Style" White House daily.He said this:"We strongly back an auto industry that we believe can and should be self-reliant. It is not our desire to either own or run one of the auto companies.”

Well, the President just joined forces with the UAW union to take over the Chrysler Corporation. And in doing so committed a crime of drastic proportions in that they reduce the Bond holders share of the company that they owned last month, to a ten percent share!

Under the agreement, the four banks will forgo claims to their portion of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt in exchange for $2 billion in cash when the deal closes.

The Treasury needs to persuade all 46 banks and hedge funds that hold Chrysler debt to go along. If not, a bankruptcy filing could still be possible for the nation's third largest automaker.

If the remaining debt holders agree to the deal, that leaves a partnership with Italian automaker Fiat Group SpA as the lone remaining hurdle to Chrysler meeting a government-imposed deadline Thursday to complete a number of major restructuring steps and become eligible for further government aid.

The UAW reached a deal over the weekend that would give it a 55 percent stake in the company and assurances over issues like health care. At no cost to the union I should remind all who bother to read this post! While the Bond holders get the shaft!

Chrysler has been living off $4 billion in government funds since the start of the year and would likely need more to avoid bankruptcy.

The people familiar with the matter said a "surgical" bankruptcy is still possible if all of Chrysler creditors don't go along with the deal, but that it was not the preferred option for resolving Chrysler's problems. Has any one bothered to ask individual bond holders who they want running the company? I am sure they would not say the union or the President, who has not even run a candy store!

The debt holders and the Treasury Department have been trading proposals in the past several weeks but had remained far apart on how much the creditors would recoup in a Chrysler restructuring. Debt holders last week offered to reduce their debt to $3.75 billion in exchange for a 40 percent stake in the company. Treasury has offered much less generous terms. What the government is offering is a Chance to take part in the first, but certainly not the last step, in Obama's change of the free Enterprise system to that of a socialized economy run by a non-responsive government.
The people close to this deal, said the government told the debt holders that they could lose everything if no deal was reached.

This is a blatant falsehood! A bankruptcy court would certainly not give the union controlling interest in Chrysler. It would certainly nullify the union contracts and make the union slash their benefits package for themselves and the retirees.That is reality as the world of economics knows it. Not the fairy tale system that Obama has used very effectively to slip the USA into the beginnings of a socialist system, and pay back a debt to one of the group's that helped him get elected, The UAW.

First Obama went around the world apologizing for America being a "bad" country under the Bush administration. Then he went to South America, and not only did he listen for 50 minutes silently while Hugo Chavez lambasted the USA, he then accepted a book damning America from Chavez that any patriot would have thrown in the trash. Now he is in the process of trashing the free enterprise syestem in the name of "CHANGE AND HOPE" that violates every principle of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that he is sworn to defend and protect!

THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING UNINFORMED

The problem that I have whenever I think of the disturbing things that are occurring in the USA today. Economic meltdown, spending by Congress out of control, weakening of our defense capability and the rapid erosion of personal liberty. I think that the fact that anyone under the age of fifty(50) has never experienced a war allows a mind set that denies the horrors and sacrifices of war.
Being a senior citizen who witnessed from afar the great struggle of WWII,including rationing of food and gasoline,and personally being involved in the Korean war has given me a perspective that my children and grand children have not had.

Because those of us who lived through "declared" war experienced the possibility that we might actually loose the war, and the real possibility that you or one of your loved ones would be killed brings a perspective of dread and angst to mind about those who were the enemies we fought. Japanese and Germans were demonized in the media and we all believed anything was allowed as long as we win the war!

Today only those who lost loved ones on 9/11/01, and those who lost men or women in Iraq and Afghanistan can related to what was an ever day event from 1941 to 1945. Even the death of civilians and hero's in uniform from 2001 to today has apparently not had the impact on the populace, as those of us who lived through WWII. A time when casualties on the Island of Tarawa in a 76 hour period were 3,000! One thousand Marines were killed by the Japanese, and two thousand wounded. This produced 1000 telegrams to anxious loved ones that brought war home with a sudden clarity and grief!And the flag in the front window was changed from a blue star to a gold star!

Today the total killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by terrorist action
on 9/11/01 is less than the KIA's in the battle for IWO JIMA! 6,821 Marines were killed in 35 days! This statistic is not mentioned to deprecate the loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, but to highlight the terrible horrors that Americans experienced daily for four years. And there was no sympathy for the enemy as is seen by the left in today's media frenzy over water boarding of terrorist who were captured, and imprisoned in Iraq.


You can call it selective transparency as do the Obamaphiles. But I believe it is that time has made the Americans forget that war is a fight to the death for us or the enemy. It is not a video game or TV series. War is horrific and destroys bodies and minds.You win if you inflict more violence on the enemy than he does on you!

Despite the fact that the Bush administration succeeded with the interrogation policy in question, when it comes to Left-partisan politics, no good deed goes unpunished.The water boarding did produce valuable information that prevented loss of life, and compared with the terrorist cutting off heads of their captives is not even in the same category.

A perfect example of the naivety that comes with the lack of experience is the speech that president Obama gave to the CIA recently regarding water boarding.
"I have put an end to the interrogation techniques described in those OLC memos, and I want to be very clear and very blunt. I've done so for a simple reason: because I believe that our nation is stronger and more secure when we deploy the full measure of both our power and the power of our values -- including the rule of law."
Tell me how we are safer when you announce to the world that you will treat terrorist prisoners better than the average American prisoner is treated in our prison system. Do we supply special meals for Kosher Jews? We supply prayer blankets, Korans and Islamic dietary foods to the prisoners in that terrible place called Gitmo!

War is Hell, and the rules of engagement do not specify that we must treat the enemy in a humane way when we kill him before he kills you. People should realize that talk is cheaper than cheap, but the nasty truth is that the only way to defeat an enemy is to be tougher on him then he is on you. All this talk of what the world thinks of us disappears when you face the enemy on the field of war!

"Values"? Like the values which form Obama's "vision for America." are "pie in the sky" values that should not even be considered in a time at war!

"Rule of law"? Everything the Obama administration has done and plans to do is an affront to constitutional Rule of Law. He has announced to the world and Al Qaeda, that we are a country of debaters not fighters! We might as well surrender now!

In fact, the the releasing the memos publicly accomplished two things immediately. First, it gave our enemies an exact knowledge of exactly how far our interrogations are allowed to go, which means that even where we have probable evidence that a captured jihadi has first hand knowledge of an imminent strike, there's absolutely no weapons left that the interrogator has to use when questioning a terrorist captive. And the president believes this makes us safer?